A World Health Summit speech initially posted online in November is regaining traction. The speech by Stefan Oelrich, a member of the Board of Management of Bayer AG and head of the Pharmaceuticals Division, has caught attention due to the stark manner in which he discusses manipulating public opinion on Covid-19 ‘vaccines.’
“We’ve heard a lot about innovation tonight,” Oelrich said several minutes into his talk. “Health for all is certainly also embedding innovation into all facets of the life sciences ecosystem. Making use of the current momentum to tackle issues beyond COVID 19.”
“We’ve seen the vaccines as the perfect example during this crisis, but innovations in the field of biotech also radically upend our view on many other disease, especially NCDs (non-communicable diseases),” he added.
“We can now think of curing many of those diseases, not just treating symptoms, as we think forward, innovation,” he continued. “And we tend to forget that, especially in the rich countries is also, sustainability at a totally different level, because those that take the leap to drive innovation in a really meaningful way and invest and take the risk to invest in R & D will also attain sustainability by creating job security and creating prosperity,” he claimed, adding, “For those that take the investment.”
“I think this is really important also for these latitudes here,” he went on. “And for us, therefore, we’re really taking that leap, us as a company buyer, in cell gene therapy, which to me is one of these we really we’re going to make a difference, hopefully, moving forward.”
“There’s some, ultimately, the mRNA vaccines, are an example for that cell and gene therapy,” he said on video. “I always like to say if we had surveyed two years ago in the public, would you be willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into body? We would’ve probably had a 95% refusal rate.”
“I think this pandemic has also opened many people’s eyes to innovation in the way that was maybe not possible before,” he added. “But it’s not just the industry that has to innovate it’s across all the value chains starting with the academia and university, and again, the world health summit.”
Fact checkers claim that Oelrich did not say what he actually said on video. However, the transcript does not lie. His words can be read verbatim above ,and the video can be watched for oneself.
There is a matter of clarification: There is no scientific evidence that mRNA shots “irreversibly” alter human DNA. The scientific claim can be found in SEC filings.
“Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA,” the SEC document states. “Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and could act as a source of side effects, mRNA-based medicines are designed to not irreversibly change cell DNA; however, side effects observed in gene therapy could negatively impact the perception of mRNA medicines despite the differences in mechanism.”
The Bayer board member’s speech is being seen by many as a clear example of a pharmaceutical company representative touting how public opinion was manipulated during the Covid pandemic. Broken promises, misinformation, mass censorship, and mandating that citizens be injected against their will is creating a major breakdown of public trust in big corporations and government agencies.
In December, a group of scientists who participated in the drive for mass vaccination against Covid-19 came forward and stated that they were participating in a “totalitarian” agenda to control populations with fear.
“Scientists on a committee that encouraged the use of fear to control people’s behaviour during the Covid pandemic have admitted its work was ‘unethical’ and ‘totalitarian’,” the Telegraph reported.
“Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour (SPI-B) expressed regret about the tactics in a new book about the role of psychology in the Government’s Covid-19 response,” the report noted.
Gavin Morgan, a psychologist on the SPI-B team, revealed the political agenda.
“Clearly, using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism. It’s not an ethical stance for any modern government. By nature I am an optimistic person, but all this has given me a more pessimistic view of people,” Morgan said.
Another scientist said the Covid pandemic response has been “dystopian.”
“In March  the Government was very worried about compliance and they thought people wouldn’t want to be locked down,” another scientist said. “There were discussions about fear being needed to encourage compliance, and decisions were made about how to ramp up the fear. The way we have used fear is dystopian.”
“The use of fear has definitely been ethically questionable,” the scientist continued. “It’s been like a weird experiment. Ultimately, it backfired because people became too scared.”
Another SPI-B member added: “You could call psychology ‘mind control’. That’s what we do… clearly we try and go about it in a positive way, but it has been used nefariously in the past.”
One scientist warned that “people use the pandemic to grab power and drive through things that wouldn’t happen otherwise… We have to be very careful about the authoritarianism that is creeping in.”
"*" indicates required fields
OPINION: This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion.